Search CRM contacts

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so no safety contradiction exists. The description adds useful behavioral context that results expose contactIds and that the tool is intended for duplicate checks, but it does not describe pagination or result-scope behavior, which would further improve transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences that front-load the core action and search criteria, then add the key outcome and intended use case. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has seven optional parameters, an output schema, and read-only annotations, so the description does not need to explain return structure. It covers the main search intent, duplicate-check use case, and default safety profile; only explicit guidance on how pagination and sorting interact with search is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With only 29% schema description coverage, the description adds useful semantic grouping: 'name, email, phone' maps to searchTerm and 'tag' maps to tags. However, it does not address page, limit, sortBy, or sortOrder, leaving those to be inferred from their param names/enums rather than compensated in prose.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific action ('Search'), the resource ('CRM contacts'), and the search dimensions ('name, email, phone or tag'), making it immediately distinct from single-contact retrieval and other knowledge search tools. The added note about contactIds and duplicate checks further clarifies the intended outcome.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear context by indicating the search supports duplicate checks before contact creation, implying this should be used prior to creating contacts. It does not explicitly name alternatives like get_contact or create_contact, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.